The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.

Buk-M3 air defense system was launched into the exercises and Specification Released

The other day, during the verification of combat readiness by anti-aircraft missile units, for the first time in Russia, the newest Buk-M3 air defense system was launched to the exercises .

The vehicles arrived at the end of 2018. In comparison with the "older brothers", the new "Buk" improved the firing range and the effectiveness of work on low-flying targets. Significantly increased the speed of calculation.Each division, armed with the Buk-M3, has 36 target channels and is equipped with the latest models of missiles with active homing heads, which indicates its superiority even over the S-300.

With one salvo, the Bukov division can destroy an entire air regiment.

Externally, the new complexes are easy to recognize by 6 rockets instead of 4. At the same time, the machine is one meter longer than its predecessors - additional electronic equipment was housed in the new compartments.

*** TTK ZRK "Buk-M3":

- Range of destruction of targets, km: 2.5 - 70;

- Height of destruction of targets, m: 15 - 35000;

- Rocket speed, m / s: 1550;

- Maximum speed of targeted targets, m / s: 3000;

- The probability of destruction of aerodynamic purposes: 0.99;

- Number of targets fired: 36.

*** Composition of the 9K317 Buk-M3 complex:

- command and control station (PBU) 9S510M;

- radar target detection 9S18M3;

- up to 6 self-propelled self-propelled fire installations (SDA) 9A317M or radar illumination and guidance (RPN) 9S36M in any combination;

Kuz is undergoing a planned refit for the next 3 years it’s first major refit since it got commissioned post that it would house 29K , They use CBG the same way IN does as ASW role and AD for ships , their doctrine does not envisage fight in mid Atlantic with CBG

I read in one of their Doctrine papers that without a Aircraft carrier their submarine asset won’t last more than half a day in full scale high end nuclear conflict and with it for 2 days

"Experts of the Moscow helicopter plant confirmed the possibility of helicopter maintenance, its preparation for the flight and reliable engine start at ambient temperatures below -45 ° C," the report says.

The tests were conducted on the basis of the airport "Mirny" and the site "Nakyn" in Yakutia. On the Mi-38, 57 flights and 18 ground tests of the power plant were carried out, and during the tests, the operational capability of all the systems and components of the integrated on-board complex and the rescue equipment after helicopter cooling was confirmed.

According to Sergey Mil Romanenko, executive director of the Moscow Mil Helicopter Plant, the declared characteristics of the helicopter fully comply with the airworthiness standards of the AP-29, harmonized with European CS-29 and American FAR-29.

According to the “Kazan” commander Alexander Beketov, the ship received a new hydro-acoustic complex and electronic weapons, which allow detecting targets at a greater distance, as well as classify them in more detail.

1 ) Supersonic drone but used mainly to escape threats for short distances thanks to afterburners.2 ) Mig and yak also worked on drones but they didn't produce them.3 ) Sukhoi working on that because they finished su-57.4 ) Can carry same load of weapon as su-57 since it has the same weapon bays so 4 kh-58/38 or guided bombs. It also shares lot of tech from it like its landing gear

1 ) Supersonic drone but used mainly to escape threats for short distances thanks to afterburners.2 ) Mig and yak also worked on drones but they didn't produce them.3 ) Sukhoi working on that because they finished su-57.4 ) Can carry same load of weapon as su-57 since it has the same weapon bays so 4 kh-58/38 or guided bombs. It also shares lot of tech from it like its landing gear

Those are some impressive specs, especially the payload part of it! To have a ROA of 2500 Kms, it should be carrying around 8T of fuel?

A flying wing design is the most optimised for Flying , Stealth and Payload the entire body is a wing which generates most life.

At high atitude you can even stop the engine and make it glide for 100's of km before it starts loosing height, A Airbus or Boeing aircraft can glide to 100 km from high altitude without engine before it starts loosing altitude.

Coming back to fuel , A 25 T aircraft is as big as Rafale and if you go by thumb rule of 1/3 fuel then it should be around 8 T plus.

If this can do a 1400 km/h or Mach 1.14 at low altitude then at high altitude it can do higher speed at higher altitude.

With TVC Engine , Supersonic Speed and LO flying Design with 2.5 T internal payload and Radius of 2500 km should be a good replacement for Mig-29 class of aircraft in a decade from now , As it carries a radar in its nose it can do a bombing role and secondary role of fighter.

The only disadvantage is you cant carry external payload for low risk mission which a 5th gen fighter aircraft would be able to do.

Austin wrote:At high atitude you can even stop the engine and make it glide for 100's of km before it starts loosing height, A Airbus or Boeing aircraft can glide to 100 km from high altitude without engine before it starts loosing altitude. .

It does not happen like that. Its true the aircraft can glide even if its engine stops..but it starts losing altitude immediately. they have something like for every X km of glide it loses Y ft in altitude.

Austin wrote:At high atitude you can even stop the engine and make it glide for 100's of km before it starts loosing height, A Airbus or Boeing aircraft can glide to 100 km from high altitude without engine before it starts loosing altitude. .

It does not happen like that. Its true the aircraft can glide even if its engine stops..but it starts losing altitude immediately. they have something like for every X km of glide it loses Y ft in altitude.

Yes but it all depends on the glide altitude and other factors as well , I read that a 747 types can glide at 100 km at high altitude before they start loosing Y ft in altitude

In yesterday meet the press when one of the reporter asked him why is Avangard launch significance is compared to Soviet first launching of satellite in space, he shared few details on Aavangard

1 ) He says when the winged glider glides through flat trajectory in dense atmosphere about Mach 20 which was difficult to imagine in the past it is a breakthrough in modern technology and materials , The tip if glider expereinces temprature of 3000 degree c which is half of sun temprature of 6000 * c and the side of glider expereince temp of 2000 * c

2 ) The vehicle is completely covered with plasma layer at the same time the trajectory is controlled as the Glider flies and melts along , The last test in December the Glider hit bulls eye

He says Zircon can travel more than 1000 km plus at Mach 9 and can reach target in couple of minutes , Can be launched from Submarine or Surface ships and can be launched from Caliber Launcher

He says if US deploys Nuclear Missile to target Moscow ( an apparent reference to it being the decision making center ) then Brussel and Washington will be targetted with Zircon , He says there is no need to change Russia nuclear policy to pre-emptive strike as the weapon is quite fast to reach the target even in Hypothetical scenario of US deploys Nuclear weapon in Ukraine and Georgia , Zircon speed can reach target in few minutes.

He says he has spoken privately to US about this ( he calls US Elites not referencing to any individual ) and told them about Russia ability to retalitate in couple of minutes. ( i.e Brussel and Washington ) . He says Subs/Ships can stay in international water and still will be able to target

Then he says he hopes things dont go that bad ( in apperent reference to Cuban Missile crises ) and that General Staff of US and Russia work together on strategic and even on Syria issue

On 28 September 1958,[3] a similar engagement resulted in one of the missiles becoming lodged in a MiG-17 without exploding, allowing it to be removed after landing. The Soviets later became aware that the Chinese had at least one Sidewinder, and after some wrangling, were able to persuade the Chinese to send them one of the captured missiles.[4] Gennadiy Sokolovskiy, later chief engineer at the Vympel team, said that "the Sidewinder missile was to us a university offering a course in missile construction technology which has upgraded our engineering education and updated our approach to production of future missiles."[5]

and then..

The Vympel team started working on a more ambitious upgrade in the late 1960s, emerging as the K-13M (R-13M, Object 380) for the IRH and K-13R (R-3R) for the SARH variant, were developed in the late 1960s. These were dubbed Advanced Atoll (AA-2C and AA-2D, respectively) in the west. The R-13M was roughly equivalent to the improved USN AIM-9G Sidewinder, with a new proximity fuse, more propellant for longer range, better maneuverability, and a more sensitive nitrogen-cooled seeker head. None, however, were all-aspect missiles. The same electronics upgrades were also applied to the Kaliningrad K-5 (AA-1) to arm fighters that did not carry the K-13.

Israel proposal was also evaluated by IAF and a senior offcer was sent to Israel ( besides Russia ) to evaluate Lancer upgrade offered by Israel

1 ) When IAF asked if they have structural data on Mig-21 the Israel told them they expected IAF to give that to them 2 ) A lavi prototype was prepared with lancer radar , it seems the radar malfunctioned after 15 mins into flight.

On 28 September 1958,[3] a similar engagement resulted in one of the missiles becoming lodged in a MiG-17 without exploding, allowing it to be removed after landing. The Soviets later became aware that the Chinese had at least one Sidewinder, and after some wrangling, were able to persuade the Chinese to send them one of the captured missiles.[4] Gennadiy Sokolovskiy, later chief engineer at the Vympel team, said that "the Sidewinder missile was to us a university offering a course in missile construction technology which has upgraded our engineering education and updated our approach to production of future missiles."[5]

and then..

The Vympel team started working on a more ambitious upgrade in the late 1960s, emerging as the K-13M (R-13M, Object 380) for the IRH and K-13R (R-3R) for the SARH variant, were developed in the late 1960s. These were dubbed Advanced Atoll (AA-2C and AA-2D, respectively) in the west. The R-13M was roughly equivalent to the improved USN AIM-9G Sidewinder, with a new proximity fuse, more propellant for longer range, better maneuverability, and a more sensitive nitrogen-cooled seeker head. None, however, were all-aspect missiles. The same electronics upgrades were also applied to the Kaliningrad K-5 (AA-1) to arm fighters that did not carry the K-13.

K-13 was also the A2A missile on the Mig-21 IIRC .......not a very accurate missile remember reading in some old Vayu issue

Russian defense designers have solved the dilemma concerning the absence of conveniences in tanks. The Armata heavy armored vehicles have been equipped with lavatories, Director for Quality and Information Technologies at the Urals Design Bureau of Transport Machine-Building Ilya Baranov told TASS on Thursday.

The continuous stay inside an armored vehicle is a specific feature that tank crews cope with, he noted

"A major hassle for them is that they cannot relieve their natural functions. That is, water and field rations are available in the tank, but all the other conveniences are, unfortunately, absent. Only the Armata vehicles solved this dilemma," Baranov stressed.

The only reason why you would need a latrin or what ever they added is to prevent the crew getting exposed from Nuclear contamination post a nuclear strike , so that the crew does not have to move out for any natural call and can drive as far as possible before they have too. Can be convenient considering all the gunner and driver are sitting in parallel in one capsule.

The goal of the project is the manufacture and carrying out of bench tests with imitation of the conditions of high-speed flight of a full-size demonstrator of a detonation direct-flow-jet engine (RAMJET) for a high-speed aircraft. In the course of the project, it was necessary to explore the possibilities of increasing the engine thrust and economic characteristics by organizing detonation combustion, as well as ways to ensure the efficiency of the engine design in the flow of hydrocarbon fuel combustion products. In addition, work was to be carried out to study the possibility of providing supersonic combustion of liquid hydrocarbon fuel in a ramjet combustion chamber.

The novelty of these studies is determined by the use of fundamentally new ways of organizing the working process in the combustion chamber of a high-speed ramjet engine and using high-performance ceramic-matrix composites with specific properties to create its design. These materials have a low density and make it possible to ensure the operability of the combustion chamber wall without a cooling system for a specified time.

Project Result

The project was successfully completed on January 31, 2018. For the first time in the world, the possibility of implementing continuous spin detonation on an air-fuel mixture in a supersonic flow and its successful use in a ramjet engine was experimentally confirmed, and the correctness of the choice of the geometry of the flow path was experimentally confirmed. A full-size DPDGD demonstrator with an OVC was manufactured and successful tests were performed in a free stream at simulating high-speed flight conditions.

The new 57E6M-E missile for the Pantsyr-S1 and SM1 air defence systems (right) is seen next to the standard 57E6-E at IDEX 2019. (Nikolai Novichkov)

Russia unveiled an upgraded variant of the Pantsyr-S1 air defence system at the IDEX show held in Abu Dhabi on 17–21 February.

A source from the Instrument Design Bureau (KBP) told Jane’s that the Pantsir-S1M can use the new 57E6M-E surface-to-air missile (SAM), which can intercept targets flying at speeds of up to 1,000 m/s. It can engage targets at altitudes of 15–18,000 m and has a slant range of 1,200–30,000 m compared to the 57E6-E missile’s 15–15,000 m altitude and 1,200–20,000 m range.

The reduction in the length of the missile has enabled a larger booster to be fitted that increases its speed from 1,300 m/s to 1,700 m/s. Nevertheless, the weight of the warhead, which is designed to destroy a target using fragmentation rods and missile debris, has grown from 20 kg to 25 kg. The overall weight of the new SAM has increased from 98 kg to 115 kg.

The upgraded Pantsir-S1M has a multifunctional fire-control radar and an upgraded search radar, both fitted with phased antenna arrays. The L-band search radar detects and tracks up to 40 targets simultaneously, while the EHF fire-control radar can engage four targets simultaneously.

"A delay of three-four months is possible, but the warship will be handed to the Navy in 2021 as scheduled," he said. The aircraft carrier will dock at the 35th shipyard in Murmansk where dry docks will be upgraded.

The USC will also upgrade landing ships of Project 11711 according to Navy remarks. "We shall take into account all drawbacks exposed by the Navy in the construction of the next pair of landing ships," Rakhmanov said. They will have improved maneuverability, ergonomics and living conditions.

russia carriers with their heavy SAM and ASM weapons and moderately sized airwings seem designed to operate with support of land based air to protect their operating areas of their submarines in the north and east. it would be left to land based bombers to keep the american carrier aviation at bay. and missile strikes on nato bases on periphery to suppress their land based anti shipping efforts.

Isn't that their old strategy since Soviet days? To target CVNs using backfires, bears, blackjacks and supersonic AShM. Wonder why did they even bother to build carriers, given their huge number of submarines as well.

Karthik S wrote:Isn't that their old strategy since Soviet days? To target CVNs using backfires, bears, blackjacks and supersonic AShM. Wonder why did they even bother to build carriers, given their huge number of submarines as well.

to deter american submarines and LRMP a/c from having a free run.

the Moskva was dedicated ASW carrier cum missile ship

The Moskvas were not true "aircraft carriers" in that they did not carry any fixed-wing aircraft; the air wing was composed entirely of helicopters. They were designed primarily as anti-submarine warfare (ASW) vessels, and her weapons and sensor suite was optimized against the nuclear submarine threat. Their strategic role was to defend the Soviet ballistic missile submarine bastions against incursions by Western attack submarines, forming the flagships of an ASW task force.

---

this is exactly the kind of ships we need / Izumo-mki to sanitize the IOR of PLAN subs. a unweildy 65000 catobar CV is of no use as a ASW strike group leader. and it will soak up several DDGs to provide it SAM cover.

better to invest in a half dozen 25000t fast ASW LPH ships with 15 IMRH each and ASW missiles.

Austin wrote:As per Montreux Convention carriers are not allowed to cross the straits and renaming to Air Capable Cruiser by SU.

But now Kuz Misssile is being removed to make extra space for Aircraft in Hanger and they will use it the same way that IN uses for fleet AD and ASW cover for Ships and Submarines.

Your info is outdated, it's not happening. (ie the info is at least 3-4 iterations old)

The extra aircraft by ripping out missiles ideas date back to I think, at least 2000; it was supposed to happen in a 2017-18 refit, but that refit became a light refit instead as Kuz went to Syria thereafter

There were also proposals for it to have new VLS and with Kalibr instead of P700 Granit, (hypersonic onyx/zircon missiles in future would use these same VLS)

But then the budget got cut in half as Kuz went in for overhaul in 2018. With only $400m available, they dropped the granit replacement idea and decided to focus on the boilers and the electronic warfare system.

And then the dry dock it was being worked in, the only one that was large enough for the Kuz, sank. (2 cranes also went with it making a 4x4 hole in the carrier) . So now, minus a suitable dry dock (and $$), the fate of the Kuz itself is unclear. Let alone it's refit and ancillary modernization.

Russia’s sole aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov has sustained damages in 52 places to the tune of 70 million rubles ($1.1 million) in the floating dock incident, Head of the United Ship-Building Corporation Alexei Rakhmanov told TASS on Thursday.

"The commission [set up to estimate the damage] counted 52 damages. Overall, the ship’s recovery will cost about 70 million rubles, i.e. this is referred to the category of inconsiderable damage within the budget of the Admiral Kuznetsov’s modernization," the chief executive said, responding to the corresponding question.

As Rakhmanov said, "we have not found anything serious that could have entailed the extension of the repair period or could not have been restored."

"The repair is planned to be completed in late 2020 and its trials are scheduled for 2021. The warship is planned to be delivered to the Navy in mid-2021," the head of Russia’s United Ship-Building Corporation said.

Karthik S wrote:Isn't that their old strategy since Soviet days? To target CVNs using backfires, bears, blackjacks and supersonic AShM. Wonder why did they even bother to build carriers, given their huge number of submarines as well.

The Soviet Union planned to send 100 Backfires against every carrier, fully expecting to lose at least half of them. The planning was detailed going in and rudimentary coming out.

“Sir, tell me why we have a detailed flight plan to the target over the vast ocean, but only a rough dot-and-dash line across Hokkaido Island on way back?” “Son,” answered the major calmly, “if your crew manages to get the plane back out of the sky over the carrier by any means, on half a wing broken by a Phoenix and a screaming prayer, no matter whether it’s somewhere over Hokkaido or directly through the moon, it’ll be the greatest possible thing in your entire life!”

While the first wave of attacks were to come from the Air, guided missile attacks from the various surface ships and the cruise missile and attack submarines would also be tasked against the carrier fleet.

"the SSGNs, two for each target carrier, and nuclear-powered attack submarines for support. In sum, up to fifteen nuclear submarines would deploy into the deep oceans to attack carrier task forces"

"It is no secret that the officers of the surface community who served on the guided-missile ships counted on surviving a battle against a U.S. Navy carrier air wing for twenty or thirty minutes and no more"

However, the main problem was not the intricacy of coordination but targeting —that is, how to find the carrier task forces at sea and to maintain a solid, constant track of their current positions. The soviets did not trust their satellite systems at the time and preferred means was the direct tracking ship

All in all, a testament to the immense sacrifices in blood, material, cost that the Soviets estimated would be needed against the US carrier and system.

Tokaraev said that even asymmetric warfare like this to take out those carriers is comparable in costs to a balanced carrier option..

BTW, this post is centric from what it takes/took to vanquish a US carrier fleet; obviously not fro perspective of ambition, fleet mix,size etc. Obviously Soviet Union had vastly more resources and presence and ambitions than Russia and India has a different security context and resource & priority context.

Singha wrote:to deter american submarines and LRMP a/c from having a free run.

the Moskva was dedicated ASW carrier cum missile ship [helicopeter carriers designed to protect the SSBN in the nuclear bastion against Western attack subs]

---this is exactly the kind of ships we need / Izumo-mki to sanitize the IOR of PLAN subs. a unweildy 65000 catobar CV is of no use as a ASW strike group leader. and it will soak up several DDGs to provide it SAM cover.

better to invest in a half dozen 25000t fast ASW LPH ships with 15 IMRH each and ASW missiles.

@Singha

Izumo was actually originally designed keeping in mind conversion to an aircraft carrier via purchase of F35B, but political factors prevented Japan from disclosing it for a long while [Japan constitution forbids offensive arms, and public opinion is also against it; furthermore, Japanes aircraft carrier hakens back to WW2 days and risked backlash]

India does not have access to competitive VSTOL planes ; and fixed wings of an aircraft carrier give significant power projection capability as well as fleet defense. It's simply different.

Obviously a mistral class or equivalent is more than sufficient for ASW helicopter sortie generation. Of course India is several years away from having sufficient naval helicopters to support this (until NUH/NMRH etc come through), and until then, nuclear submarines, and land based P8is and hopefully underwater fixed sensors will be used along with any helicopters that can be scraped up for our ships (destroyers etc ) . India can also use ASW ships.

Advantage with chopper and sonobuoys is range (except vs P8) and flexibility of basing